E.D. Releases Regulations To Strengthen Oversight of Colleges

After several delays, the Education Department has released a set of
controversial regulations designed to strengthen federal oversight of
colleges and universities.

Although a notice of proposed rulemaking was originally scheduled to
appear in the Nov. 30 Federal Register, the department postponed
publication until last month to respond to intense criticism that had
arisen among higher-education leaders privy to early versions of the
rules. (See Education Week, Dec. 8, 1993.)

College presidents and higher-education lobbyists had charged that
the proposed regulations were unduly burdensome and would threaten the
independence of colleges and universities.

Released on Jan. 17 with a 55-day comment period, the draft
regulations would increase accrediting agencies' responsibilities and
would also establish State Postsecondary Review Entities to tighten
oversight of institutions' finances and academic programs.

Both the accrediting-agency and SPRE regulations are part of a
"program-integrity triad'' outlined in the 1992 Higher Education Act
amendments. The program-integrity regulations were designed to improve
accountability in response to revelations of fraud and abuse in
student-aid programs that has resulted in the loss of millions of
dollars.

The department expects to issue regulations outlining the third part
of the triad--which will revamp the department's eligibility and
certification process--sometime in the next few weeks, according to
Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education David A.
Longanecker.

Under the new regulations, accrediting agencies would be required to
establish standards for assessing institutions in 12 areas, among them
recruiting and admissions practices, program lengths and tuition,
curriculum, and graduation rates.

In non-degree vocational programs, measures would include
program-completion rates, job-placement rates, and students'
performance on state licensing exams.

All postsecondary institutions would be required to comply with the
regulations in order for their students to receive federal aid.

Less Intrusive?

In a briefing session with reporters last month, Mr. Longanecker
said he expected that much of the original criticism would subside as a
result of the department's revisions. In addition, he suggested that
some of the criticism resulted from misunderstandings.

He cited as an example higher education leaders' concern that the
new SPRE's would lead to excessive federal demands for private
records.

However, he said, an SPRE would only conduct a review if an
institution set off one of a list of "triggers''--by posting a
loan-default rate higher than 25 percent, for example--or if the
department had reason to suspect fraud.

But Mr. Longanecker also acknowledged that institutions would still
be expected to collect the data.

"My sense is that the department has heard the concerns of the
higher-education community and they've made some positive movement in
the direction we've urged,'' said David Warren, the president of the
National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities.

"In particular, I think they've backed away from the intrusiveness
having to do with curriculum and faculty in the accreditation
portion,'' he said.

However, Mr. Warren said that he remains concerned about how the new
regulations will affect colleges' tuition and fee policies.

John A. Curry, the president of Northeastern University, was
somewhat less sanguine.

"These regulations are a step in the right direction, but there's
still a long way to go,'' he said in a statement. "They continue to
represent an unnecessary intrusion into the internal affairs of private
colleges and universities.''

"They also duplicate a peer-review system that is effective and
efficient at no cost to the taxpayers,'' he added.

Vol. 13, Issue 19, Page 13

Published in Print: February 2, 1994, as E.D. Releases Regulations To Strengthen Oversight of Colleges

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.